Open letter to commissioners

To the Editor:

Commissioner Rita Windom

Commissioner John Konzen

Commissioner Marianne Roose

Interested Persons:

What transpired at last Wednesdays meeting clearly demonstrates the need for you, the commissioners, to make public your intentions relative to defining our customs and culture in preparation for developing a coordination strategy.

Those of us having to rely on newspapers for piecemeal information doled out periodically, only leads to the impression that much more is going on beneath the radar.

Comments made after the meeting on the 9th require that I clarify my position, as reading my notes from two separate drafts at the meeting apparently led to some erroneous conclusions. I want your record to reflect that the comments were my own.

Your record should also reflect that my attendance at the meeting was not made in an effort to undermine the efforts of the second entity which has become involved in the coordination planning endeavor.

I drove to Libby for two primary reasons. One was to make sure the commissioners employ the very best legal approach to developing a county plan. The second reason was to urge that fairness be shown to those of your constituents who organized the Lincoln County Natural Resource Council and have been meeting since July to develop an acceptable plan for your consideration.

On Oct. 10 you granted a half hour of your time to spokespersons for the LCNRC who presented you with tangible proof of their work in progress to provide a coordination strategy for our county.

This Council, headed up by people who have attended training workshops conducted by attorney Fred Kelly Grant, a nationally recognized authority on the coordination process, has also been collaborating efforts with people in Flathead and Sanders counties who have attended those workshops and see the advantage of implementing this effective tool. I understand that, to date, you have not commented on the documentation they presented to you at that time, nor given them any indication of your intentions.

You can imagine the consternation of the LCNRC members who paid to educate themselves on the coordination process to read in the paper that another entity has stepped forward to write a "customs and culture" definition (admittedly having done this before) and by recommending people who are not knowledgeable about the process to serve on their committee, pretty clearly demonstrated their intent to control whatever coordination efforts are anticipated.

Unfortunately your lack of articulated intentions has promoted disharmony in the county and pitted friends against friends.

People involved have had their motives questioned, and personality issues have been allowed to eclipse the overall goal.

I am not going to raise the question of motivation, as I believe all involved have now, or in the past, demonstrated their commitment to the good of Lincoln County.

I am no expert on coordination, but I have closely monitored the working of the LCNRC, listened to experts and learned that there are two significant approaches to empowering counties. It is obvious that the two involved entities in the county are in sharp disagreement on which is preferred.

The ideal coordinating status for commissioners is the one which excludes third party intervention between counties and federal agencies.

It is my belief that the process taught by attorney Fred Kelly Grant will produce a much more powerful tool to place in your hand and one which, I understand, must statutorily be recognized by agencies of the federal government (Please refer in the manual provided you by the LCNRC to the section referencing the Congressional Mandate for Coordination and Statutory Coordination Requirement. Therein is cited the federal authority for this process).

It is also my understanding that attorney Fred Kelly Grant is retired and may be available to elaborate on those distinctions should you so desire. I am told he charges only for his travel and accommodations.

I have even more questions after Wednesday's meeting where a good portion of the coordination planning discussion addressed actions already considered by you, and about which only you and a limited number in attendance had knowledge.

Among the many, I question the wisdom of inviting Idaho tribes to help define Lincoln County's customs and culture, and the participation of individuals employed by any federal governmental agency. Also, having some knowledge of the Flathead County Coordination efforts, I believe it is imperative that you understand the facts which led to implementation delays for Flathead County's original Resource Plan.

I am told it was based on the Learn process and that adjustments in the form of amendments were necessary for it to be the effective tool intended. You need to hear it from them.

Finally, I request that to facilitate efforts to develop a viable strategy you schedule a public hearing, not to solicit comments on what you have already resolved to do with limited, or no public input, but to hear from advocates of the two similar, but different avenues toward developing the most effective strategy.

Only by hearing from those most knowledgeable about the coordination process and comparing the success history of the two, can you really know what methodology is best for our county.

A public hearing educates the public about the reasons for coordination, shows no favoritism, provides a forum on which to base your future decisions, proves your commitment to all concerned and above all, demonstrates your willingness to be accountable to the people who will be underwriting the cost of this endeavor, and whose futures depend on the decisions to be made.

I sincerely thank you for your consideration.

Aubyn Curtiss

Senate District 1